Father Koch: Are we afraid of what Jesus is asking of us?
October 12, 2024 at 9:00 a.m.
A righteous and rich young man approached Jesus and asked him the core question about sharing in eternal life. When told that he must get rid of everything and provide for the poor he walked away from Jesus. We often wonder what became of this young man. While there are various stories told of him in the tradition of the Church, he never again appears in the ministry of Jesus or the New Testament. Each of us is challenged in the same way. It is what we do that is above and beyond the expected that is the true measure of our faith and of our share in eternal life.
Perhaps a key to understanding this man is not what he has but what he lacks. Yes, he was rich. That in itself provides a background to him. He claims to have been observant of the commandments since his youth. From this we can infer that he was a righteous man, one who was seriously committed to his Jewish tradition. The evangelist does not reference him as a member of one of the social classes with Judaism, so we expect that he is neither a Sadducee nor a Pharisee.
We also do not know how long he had been following Jesus, and how much of the preaching of Jesus with which he was familiar, or if he was merely a passerby, one who was curious. Certainly he was impacted by something that Jesus had said and was interested in following him, and was especially focused on eternal life.
Determining who he was is now impossible. Over the centuries pious legends and traditions have emerged around this man, but he remains for all time a nameless person who walked away from Jesus never to be seen or heard from again.
Jesus was moved by this man, so much so that it is the only time we hear that in an encounter with someone that: “Jesus, looking at him, loved him …” Jesus was struck by his faithfulness to the commandments, given that most of the people with whom Jesus associated were either known or presumed sinners. The response of Jesus to this man was palpable enough that the disciples noticed and the evangelist made note of it.
In reflecting on this man many look at him as a man of greed, perhaps immature, who viewed his life in terms of his possessions. In many ways, his wealth made it easier for him to be a faithful observer of the Mosaic Law and the traditions. He had the luxury and the means to follow the dietary laws, to avoid the occasions of uncleanness that burdened the working classes and the farmers, and may even have had a mikvah in his home, so that he could purify himself as needed according to the Law.
Yet, looking deeper into this man, he seems to lack something. Jesus loved him. Did he return that love” Did he even recognize that love? Was he capable of seeing the primacy of love in his life? We cannot be sure that he “loved” his possessions, but they were for him a means to an end, perhaps the only way he imagined that he could be a faithful observer of the Law.
He seems to lack a sense of compassion, indeed of love, for the poor, and for the underprivileged.
In demonstrating love for this man, Jesus challenged him to love him in return, and in a more specific way, to love others. He was instructed that in order to show his life, he had to sell all he owned and give it to the poor.
There were many lessons in this for this man. Here he would be challenged to find the means to follow the Law more carefully, and to seek genuine forgiveness for those occasions when he did not. His service to the poor would be transformative for him and not just for them.
In a sense this man is the antithesis of the beloved St. Francis of Assisi. In his encounter with Jesus as leper, he understood that he needed to sacrifice everything for love -- love of God, love of neighbor, love of the poorest of the poor, love of creation itself.
The call of discipleship is grounded in this same sense of love. We cannot, Jesus reminds us, walk in two contrary worlds. Any love not grounded first in God and neighbor leads not to eternal life but to destruction.
Father Garry Koch is pastor of St. Benedict Parish, Holmdel.
Related Stories
Tuesday, December 03, 2024
E-Editions
Events
A righteous and rich young man approached Jesus and asked him the core question about sharing in eternal life. When told that he must get rid of everything and provide for the poor he walked away from Jesus. We often wonder what became of this young man. While there are various stories told of him in the tradition of the Church, he never again appears in the ministry of Jesus or the New Testament. Each of us is challenged in the same way. It is what we do that is above and beyond the expected that is the true measure of our faith and of our share in eternal life.
Perhaps a key to understanding this man is not what he has but what he lacks. Yes, he was rich. That in itself provides a background to him. He claims to have been observant of the commandments since his youth. From this we can infer that he was a righteous man, one who was seriously committed to his Jewish tradition. The evangelist does not reference him as a member of one of the social classes with Judaism, so we expect that he is neither a Sadducee nor a Pharisee.
We also do not know how long he had been following Jesus, and how much of the preaching of Jesus with which he was familiar, or if he was merely a passerby, one who was curious. Certainly he was impacted by something that Jesus had said and was interested in following him, and was especially focused on eternal life.
Determining who he was is now impossible. Over the centuries pious legends and traditions have emerged around this man, but he remains for all time a nameless person who walked away from Jesus never to be seen or heard from again.
Jesus was moved by this man, so much so that it is the only time we hear that in an encounter with someone that: “Jesus, looking at him, loved him …” Jesus was struck by his faithfulness to the commandments, given that most of the people with whom Jesus associated were either known or presumed sinners. The response of Jesus to this man was palpable enough that the disciples noticed and the evangelist made note of it.
In reflecting on this man many look at him as a man of greed, perhaps immature, who viewed his life in terms of his possessions. In many ways, his wealth made it easier for him to be a faithful observer of the Mosaic Law and the traditions. He had the luxury and the means to follow the dietary laws, to avoid the occasions of uncleanness that burdened the working classes and the farmers, and may even have had a mikvah in his home, so that he could purify himself as needed according to the Law.
Yet, looking deeper into this man, he seems to lack something. Jesus loved him. Did he return that love” Did he even recognize that love? Was he capable of seeing the primacy of love in his life? We cannot be sure that he “loved” his possessions, but they were for him a means to an end, perhaps the only way he imagined that he could be a faithful observer of the Law.
He seems to lack a sense of compassion, indeed of love, for the poor, and for the underprivileged.
In demonstrating love for this man, Jesus challenged him to love him in return, and in a more specific way, to love others. He was instructed that in order to show his life, he had to sell all he owned and give it to the poor.
There were many lessons in this for this man. Here he would be challenged to find the means to follow the Law more carefully, and to seek genuine forgiveness for those occasions when he did not. His service to the poor would be transformative for him and not just for them.
In a sense this man is the antithesis of the beloved St. Francis of Assisi. In his encounter with Jesus as leper, he understood that he needed to sacrifice everything for love -- love of God, love of neighbor, love of the poorest of the poor, love of creation itself.
The call of discipleship is grounded in this same sense of love. We cannot, Jesus reminds us, walk in two contrary worlds. Any love not grounded first in God and neighbor leads not to eternal life but to destruction.
Father Garry Koch is pastor of St. Benedict Parish, Holmdel.